Earticle

본 연구는 2015년 ｢중국제조 2025｣부터 현재까지 중국 자율주행 자동차 정책이 어떠한 과정을 거쳐 전개되어 왔는지를 중앙정부의 주요 정책을 통해 검토함으로써, 관련 정책의 특징과 정책 수립·운영의 원리, 그리고 한국에 대한 시사점을 도출하는 것을 목적으로 하였다. 분석 결과 중국은 자율주행 자동차를 단순한 산업육성 대상이 아니라 과학기술의 자립과 자강, 국가전략, 나아가 국가안보와 연결된 핵심 정책영역으로 위치시키고 있음을 확인할 수 있었다. 정책 추진 방식에서는 정책 초기 단계에 신중하게 가능성을 타진하는 점진적 접근을 취하였으나, 일정한 전략 방향이 설정된 이후에는 상용화에 가속도를 붙이며 관련 정책을 빠르게 추진하는 양상을 확인할 수 있었다. 또한 중앙정부가 기본 방향과 제도적 틀을 제시하고 지방정부가 실증과 적용을 담당하는 중앙·지방 분업형 추진모델, 규범성문건을 활용한 유연한 대응도 주요 특징으로 확인되었다. 이러한 중국의 경험은 한국이 자율주행 자동차 정책을 기술개발 지원이나 시범운행 허용에 머물게 할 것이 아니라, 실증에서 상용화로 이어지는 제도적 경로를 보다 촘촘하게 설계해야 함을 시사한다. 또한 지역별 교통환경과 여러 사정을 반영하여 지방정부가 능동적으로 실증을 설계·운영할 수 있는 제도적 여지를 확대할 필요가 있다. 반면 중국 사례는 빠른 상용화 추진 과정에서 일자리 문제와 사회적 갈등에 대한 대응이 후행할 경우 사회적 갈등이 뒤늦게 표출되어 정책 추진력이 약화될 수 있음을 보여주는 반면교사로도 기능한다.

This study aims to examine how China's autonomous vehicle policy has developed from the release of Made in China 2025 in 2015 to the present by analyzing major central government policy documents, and to derive the characteristics of such policies, the principles underlying their formulation and implementation, and implications for Korea. The analysis shows that China has positioned autonomous vehicles not merely as an object of industrial promotion, but as a core policy area linked to scientific and technological self-reliance and self-strengthening (自立自强), national strategy, and even national security. In terms of policy implementation, China initially adopted a gradual approach that cautiously explored the feasibility of autonomous driving. However, once a strategic direction was established, it began to accelerate commercialization and rapidly promote related policies. In addition, a central-local division of roles — in which the central government presents the basic direction and institutional framework while local governments take charge of demonstration and application — as well as flexible responses through sub-regulatory policy instruments, were also identified as key characteristics. China's experience suggests that Korea should not limit its autonomous vehicle policy to support for technology development or permission for pilot operation. Rather, Korea needs to design a more detailed institutional pathway connecting demonstration projects to commercialization. It is also necessary to expand the institutional room for local governments to actively design and operate demonstration projects by reflecting regional traffic environments, industrial bases, and other local conditions. At the same time, the Chinese case also serves as a cautionary tale: if responses to employment issues and social conflicts lag behind the rapid promotion of commercialization, such conflicts may emerge belatedly and weaken the momentum of policy implementation.

Against the backdrop of the accelerated iteration of the global intelligent connected vehicle industry, Standard-Essential Patents (SEPs) have become the core focus of competition in the industrial chain. The deep integration of communication technology and the automotive industry has expanded the application scope of SEPs in the field of intelligent connected vehicles. However, issues such as the ambiguous definition of the FRAND principle and inadequate adaptability of licensing models have given rise to a series of disputes, including disputes over licensing levels, abuse of package licensing, and patent holdup. The combination of the mandatory nature of standards and the inherent monopolistic nature of patents has placed SEP holders in a dominant position, while automakers and component suppliers are at a disadvantage due to insufficient negotiation experience and technical dependence. Compared with traditional private law adjustment paths, antitrust regulation, with its universality and extensiveness, has emerged as an effective way to address the chaos in SEP licensing. This paper takes the practice of SEP licensing in intelligent connected vehicles as the research object, systematically analyzes the core issues in the current licensing process, sorts out the theoretical basis and application logic of antitrust regulation, explores identification standards and implementation paths through typical cases, and finally proposes institutional optimization suggestions that balance rights protection and market competition. It aims to provide legal support and practical reference for the healthy development of China's intelligent connected vehicle industry.

Since the United Kingdom and the European Union jointly developed a Driver Drowsiness and Attention Warning system in 2021, the privacy of the interior space of Intelligent Connected Vehicles has been reduced due to safety requirements in the car, increase or decrease due to the need for rescue positioning and accident verification in emergencies. ICV has become a typical product of deep integration, integrated application of traditional industry, AI, and information communication technology, and the transformation of vehicles into intelligent mobile terminals. However, massive information transmission involving multiple systems means that once an information security accident occurs in an Intelligent Networked Vehicle, it will seriously impact property, personal safety, and even national security. At the same time, personal information at a specific stage is continuously collected for calculation and analysis to improve intelligent networked vehicles' driving safety and intelligence. This process brings three risk patterns: data processing, technical compliance, and unclear specifications. These risks are formed in the critical links of information processing. Two significant problems are challenging to deal with existing regulations and difficult for enterprises to implement compliance construction, leading to the dilemma of personal information regulation in intelligently networked no vehicles. Especially on December 20, 2022, the Chinese smart electric vehicle Nio started being blackmailed by hackers, indicating a great risk of data theft by automobile companies. Attention should be paid to how to protect data. It must be more coordinated between laws, regulations, and technical standards. A systematic supporting system needs to be formed to ensure the vitality of industrial development. Starting from the two-dimensional perspective of technology and law, this paper proposes a solution path of system Coordination, regulatory sandbox, and industrial autonomy by sorting out the contradictions between norms and technical processing to get rid of the existing dilemma of insufficient protection, insufficient regulation, and insufficient utilization, and realize industrial collaboration between personal information and internal.